american studies forum: winter 1992
TRANSCRIPT
8/6/2019 American Studies Forum: Winter 1992
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/american-studies-forum-winter-1992 1/9
M RC N
S -UDIES:FO~llM
January/February 1992
Confluence and Diversity:
BYU's Parochial Internationalismby Gerh ard B ac h
November, for the Da ily Un iv er se , is themonth of multi-culturalism. On 12November 1990, a front page article notedhow "Multi-cultures contribute to
diversity" at BYU. A year later, again inNovember, BYU's internationalism wasfeatured once more, in articles celebratingthe numbers of nations represented at this
university. Approaching the "hill," we arecomforted to know that "The world is Our
Campus," and as we participate inInternational Week, its theme - "The
World in Our Hands" - provides for us"internationals" a sense of shelter. Piecharts nicely illustrate how we flowtogether into a 6.5 percent segment of the
larger university community.Terminological differentiation even allowsus to ascertain our difference. Foreign
students at BYU are officially classifiedinto two groups: international students andmulti-cultural students. "An international
student not only comes from outside theUnited States, but from a culture which
differs significantly from that ofAmerica's" (Da ily Un iv er se , 12Nov.
1990).Whenever I read such things about
myself I am always left with a feeling ofnausea. Who am I, as an "international,"even a "multi-cultural," in the eyes of
BYU? The answer would greatly help meto decide which "native costume" to wearon the first day of International Week. Is
there something in my culturalcomposition that makes me significantly
different from America's culture? If so,what are the ingredients? I am even more
troubled about the "others" againstwhom/which I am identified as more or
less significantly different: what is"America's culture," and who defines it atBYU? American Heritage 1oo? The
English department's alleged "radicals?"
The cougars? VOICE? The jukebox in
the Cougareat?While, in any discussion of this latter
question, the natives would alert the
internationals that the answer is "all of theabove," and that BYU prides itself (withincertain limits, to be sure) of its diversity asrepresentational of the larger American
1
DAVID M. KENNEDY CENTER FOR INT.ERNATIONAL STUDIES
8/6/2019 American Studies Forum: Winter 1992
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/american-studies-forum-winter-1992 2/9
cultural spectrum (within a clearly defined
frame, to be sure), the same natives would
refer to those from foreign countries
participating in the discourse of diversity
as "international students" or "multi-
culturals." And rightly so - is there not an
"International Student Association" oncampus? Struggling with the grammatical
intricacies of the English language, we
internationals tend to assume that
"international" qualifies the Association
and not its members. Wrong again!
Common usage and practice here teach us
that it's a native BYU agency sheltering
"international students." Distraught, we
consult the dictionary: "International,
adj.: (1) between or among nations
( in te rna tional t rade) ; (2) of or pertainingto two or more nations or their citizens (a
matter o f interna tio nal con cern ); (3)
pertaining to the relations between nations
( in te rna ti ona l l aw ) ; (4) having members or
activities in several nations (a n
internat ional organiza tion) ." Apparently,
objects are international, not individuals;
apparently, it takes more than one
nationally distinct individual to make an
object or event international. Apparently,
the term contains a sense of balancebetween the participants. It is a balance
which allows for a singular identity. In
other words, calling a Mexican a "multi-
cultural" achieves exactly the opposite of
what it possibly intends to do; it strips that
person of his or her cultural, ethnic, and
national distinctness and singularity, But
then, "multi-cultural" sounds so profound,
does it not? Well, a spade, at times, is
just a spade, and a student from a foreign
country is "just" that.Why bother American Studies students
with such distant concerns? First, because
such phrases as "The World is Our
Campus" or "The World in Our Hands"
generate a parochialism which walks about
in the guise of internationalism. Far-
fetched? Picky? Perhaps. It depends on
how willing we are to stretch our
imaginations in confrontation with verbal
absolutes. Ironically, the truth behind the
guise shines through when we reverse the
particulars in these generalizations: "The
Campus is Our World;" "Our Hands in the
World." Second, because what mayappear to be -distant is actually close at
hand; American Studies, in its more recent
revisions of self-definition (H.L. Gates, L.
Fishbein), is becoming an international
discipline where "othering," as in such
handy formulas as "we and the rest of the
world," has no place. Leslie Fishbein
warns against such "excessive
introspection": "If our field is to thrive as
a discipline, it must abandon its insularity
.and parochialism. We need to examinewhether other cultures have shared some
of our dominant myths, for example the
importance of the frontier to the
development of democracy, a fascination
with machines, a nostalgia for the Garden
of Eden - the notion that abundance has
peculiarly determined the national
character. At this juncture, we especially
need to know how other societies have
dealt with issues of race, gender, and
ethnicity; how they have coped withpopular resistance to the cultural
hegemony of their dominant classes. Only
then can we begin to know ourselves"
(C hro nic le o f H ig he r E du ca tio n, 15 Aug.
1990).
Only then, I feel the need to add, can I
stop wondering what gives me second
thoughts about my morning yogurt, whose
package advertises, in so many catchy
words, how its "multiple cultures" add zip
to the way it tastes. If I am the culture, isBYU then the yogurt?
Editor's Note: Gerhard Bach i s P ro fe ss or
of American Studies at Paedagogische
Hochschule i n He ide lbe rg , Germany.Since 1990 he has b een V is itin g P ro fe ss or
at BYU .
2
8/6/2019 American Studies Forum: Winter 1992
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/american-studies-forum-winter-1992 3/9
AMERICAN STUDIES SPRING & SUMMER 1992 COURSES
COURSE PROFESSOR TITLE
SPRING
English 495R
(will count for AS credit
see Dr. Cracroft)
Cracroft Myth and Reality
in Western
American Lit.
Economics 110 Waters Econ. Principles
& Problems
History 121 Pearcy American History
Humanities 262 Basset t American Hum.
Political Science 110 Vetterli American Govt.
SUMMER
Economics 110 Wimmer Econ. Principles
& Problems
Geography 450 Staff Geography of
North America
History 120 York American History
Hill
Political Science 110 Daynes American Govt.
3
8/6/2019 American Studies Forum: Winter 1992
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/american-studies-forum-winter-1992 4/9
MYTH OF TIlE MONTH
The popular image of the frontier as a
place of violence is only partly due to the
fact that the place often was violent. Most
of it is due to hype, particularly
Hollywood hype. The truth is many morepeople have died in Hollywood westerns
than ever died on the real frontier (Indian
wars considered apart). In the real Dodge
City, for instance, there were just five
killings in 1878, the most homicidal year
in the little town's frontier history -
scarcely enough to sustain a typical two
hour movie.
Most surprisingly, there is no evidence
anyone was ever killed in a frontier shoot-
out at high noon.- Legends, Lies, and Cherished Myths of
Americ an H isto ry
AS JEOPARDY
1. After becoming a Supreme Court
justice, he admitted he had been a
member of the Ku Klux Klan.
2. This nation has the largestreservation and the largest
population of any other Native
American tribe.
3. This U.S. President was accused of
adultery, and in fact, fathered an
illegitimate son ten years before
becoming President.
4. Hester Prynne, in The Scarlet
Letter, named her daughter this,because she paid such a "great
price" for her.
5. This twentieth century U.S.
President later became a Supreme
Court Justice.
WHO SAID IT?
1. "From where the sun now stands, I
will fight no more forever."
2 . "The only thing we have to fear is
fear itself - nameless, unreasoning,unjustified terror which paralyzes
needed efforts to convert retreat
into advance."
3 . "I do not wish to think, or speak,
or write, with moderation ... I am in
earnest - I will not equivocate - I
will not excuse - 1 will not retreat a
single inch - AND I WILL BE
HEARD."
4 . "Ich bin ein Berliner. "
5 . "We must guard against the
acquisition of unwarranted
influence, whether sought or
unsought, by the military-industrial
complex."
8/6/2019 American Studies Forum: Winter 1992
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/american-studies-forum-winter-1992 5/9
Neotraditionalism: A Return to Traditional Values?by Derek E. Baird
Forget about political correctness,gender, class, and race - worry insteadabout getting back to basics and back to
Mother Earth. After all, it's part of thelatest fad to hit the baby-boom generation.Yes, those whining thirtysomethings havecome up with something better thanmaterialism, they call it Neotraditionalism.
They call themselves, "Neotrads. "Neotraditionalism is the cultural wave of
the nineties. Being a Neotrad meansgetting back to basics - eighties style -with a Range Rover, $350 hiking bootsfrom Nordstrom, a Williams-Sonoma
bread machine, and wearing the latest intweed, plaid, and denim from the Ralph
Lauren "country weekend" line. Don'tforget the crown jewel ofNeotraditionalism - a country home full ofShaker inspired furniture. In short,Neotraditionalism means reveling in the
old without having to give up one singlething of the new.Neotraditionalism can trace its roots back
to the 1950s. The parents of the Neotrads,
who themselves were raised during thedepression and World War IT, found littleto be nostalgic about. Therefore, as they
raised their children in the brand new VAfinanced suburbs of the '50s, theyencouraged their little Neotradsto look
towards the future, not the past.Now as the Neotrads become parents and
look back on their Childhoods, they findthat they don't, in fact, have anysubstantial memories to fallback on. So,
they are referring to a mythicagrarian past- with a bit of Reaganesque materialism
thrown in to make agrarian life morebearable. Perhaps R.alphWhitehead, a
social historian at the University ofMassachusetts explains it best:
"Contemporary American culture has theability, we're so communicationsintensive, that we can dredge up any
historical experience and ransack it." Thisnew cultural trend has, naturally, led to adebate as to whether Neotraditionalism is asign that American society is moving
"away from self-fulfillment, towards a
greater concern for others. "The Institute for American Values(IA V),
in June, 1991, compiled a report on atrend they titled "The New Familism." Intheir report, the institute pointed to anumber of factors which support their
.hypothesis of this new trend of familism.For example, they stated that the birth rate
in 1990 was at its highest number since1964. The divorce rate, it appears, hasalso leveled off. In addition, the institutereports a "leveling off of women's
participation in the work force." This newfamilism, the IAV concluded, "wouldcombine individualism and careercommitment for both sexes with a strongsense of family obligations. "
Norval D. Glenn, a sociology professorat the University of Texas, has his doubts
about the future of the Neotraditionalist
movement. "They (the Neotrads) wantstable families, and they want the freedomto renegotiate the roles within the family.They want things that are basicallyunattainable." Some experts feel,however, that Neotraditionalism is not just
another yuppie obsession, but, in fact,signals real desire for change. Richard
Vigilante, editor of The New Yorker
magazine, who has tracked the baby
boomers for years, feels that "people don'ttake three hours out of their Sunday (forchurch) for superficial reasons. I thinkthere are deep and powerful reasons for
5
8/6/2019 American Studies Forum: Winter 1992
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/american-studies-forum-winter-1992 6/9
it." Inferential Focus found, in a recent
marketing report for the Hilton Hotel chain
that 63 % of Hilton employees said they
would sacrifice a day's pay if they could
have that day off. Time is becoming more
valuable than money.
Perhaps the baby boom generation has(at last) found itself in Neotraditionalism.
Or maybe Neotraditionalism is an attempt
by the baby boomers to bury their sins of
materialism under the guise of a return to
traditional American values. Or maybe,
just maybe, they are just following the
lead of their icon Ronald Reagan, who
back at his own "ranch II in Santa Barbara,
is himself getting back to nature. Perhaps,
as the Neotrads sit in their country homes
eating their gourmet muffins and sippingtheir imported French roast coffee, they
will be able to reconcile their past with
their children's future - or maybe they
won't get it all.
AS JEOPARDY ANSWERS
* Remember, all correct responses must be
phrased in the form of a question!
1. Hugo Black
2. The Navajo Nation
3. Grover Cleveland (oppositionists
chanted at rallies, "Ma, Ma,
Where's my Pa?")
4. Pearl
5. William Howard Taft
WHO SAID IT ANSWERS
1. Chief Joseph, of Nez Perce Indians
upon surrender to U.S. troops.
2. Franklin D. Roosevelt, First
Inaugural Address 1933.
3. William Lloyd Garrison,
_ abolitionist, in The Liberator, 1831.
4. John F. Kennedy, speech at the
Berlin Wall, 1963. ("I am a
Berliner. ")
5. Dwight D. Eisenhower, farewell
address, 1961.
TM Far Sitk, copyriahl 1992, Univenal Preu 8yDdicaIc,
6
8/6/2019 American Studies Forum: Winter 1992
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/american-studies-forum-winter-1992 7/9
Mak ing V is ib le th e Inv isib le :
Our Imagin ed In te lle ctu al Commun ityby David Pulsipher
Editor's Note: David Pulsipher is a recent
BYU American Studies Grad. He is
currently working on a Ph.D.in AS at the University of Minnesota. The
following essay is an edited version of a
paper David wrote at Minnesota last
semester. This article is the first in a
series written by former BYU American
Studies Students who are pursuing
graduate degrees in AS.
The other day in our American Studies
seminar someone remarked, "The Right
often attacks The University." I've beenintrigued by these kinds of comments all
quarter, because they imply The
University is a cohesive community, and
that this cohesive community is "us" - that
as members of The Academy (often
synonymous with The University) we
belong to a common community called,
"The Intellectual Community. "
The idea of an Intellectual Community
(as with every imagined community) is
fraught with inconsistencies andcontradictions. It is a flexible concept.
The boundaries expand and contract,
according to the specific circumstances
under which the Intellectual Community is
being imagined.
The dynamics of this elastic imagining
are intriguing to watch, as individuals
posture themselves within or without the
Intellectual Community according to the
situation. The boundaries of this imagined
community are so loosely defmed, and socontingent on circumstance and one's own
position within the Intellectual
Community, that it is important for me to
define my position as a "participant
imaginer" of the community. When I
speak of the "Intellectual Community," I
am speaking from my position within
American Studies (which may be
considered an intellectual sub-community).And in general, I am speaking to other
members of the American Studies
Intellectual Sub-Community, as well as the
several other sub-communities that "we"
consider friendly to "our" agenda. What I
am suggesting is that this position within
American Studies colors and shades the
way I imagine the larger Intellectual
Community.
It will be obvious to most American
Studies readers that my ideas refer toBenedict Anderson's book, Imagined
Communities. I am not trying to apply his
whole analysis of how nations imagine
themselves to the Intellectual Community,
but I am taking as a point of departure
several ideas from his introduction, where
he outlines his concept of an "Imagined
Community. "
Just as the German has a certain "sense"
of what it means to be German, and the
non-German also has a "sense" (orstereotype) of what it means to be German
(it might even be called "the essence of
German-ness"), the Intellectual
Community has a certain "sense" of what it
means to be intellectual ( or "the essence
of Intellectual-ness"), and non-intellectuals
have their stereotypes about intellectuals.
Almost any German will tell you that
his/her country is anything but
homogenous, and yet we persist in
analyzing "What is German aboutGermany?" Likewise, I am certain almost
any graduate student or faculty member
would refute the suggestion that our
Intellectual Community enjoys any
semblance of solidarity. Yet there seems
to be, nonetheless, a certain sense of what
7
8/6/2019 American Studies Forum: Winter 1992
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/american-studies-forum-winter-1992 8/9
constitutes "Intellectual-ness," and thatintuitive sense makes it surprisingly easy
to determine who is part of the IntellectualCommunity and who is not.What is this Intellectual-ness? What is
the common bond that we intuitively feel?
To quote Anderson: "The members ofeven the smallest nations will never knowmost of their fellow-members, meet them,or even hear of them, yet in the minds ofeach lives the image of their communion. "Maybe the communion of the Intellectual
Community is more actual than imagined.But the Intellectual Community is still toolarge for a member to be aware of even ahandful of other Intellectuals, and there are
still too many Intellectual books for
everyone to read.What then is the essence of Intellectual-ness? IfAnderson is right andcommunities are distinguished "by thestyle in which they are imagined," what
then is the "style" of the IntellectualCommunity? Certainly the answer is acomplicated one, and is the source of
constant intellectual debate. I am not
going to attempt a complicated answer, butI would like to propose one characteristic
I've observed, at least within my own sub-community, the American Studies
Intellectual Community. It might even be
described as a "style of thinking" whichsets our Intellectual Community apart fromother communities. It is a tendency (orstyle) that I call "making the visible the
invisible."David Levernz begins M anhood and the
American Renaissance with this quote: "In
1980, when my book on the Puritans had
just come out, one of my more well-known colleagues sat down in my office toread the jacket flap. 'Oh,' he said, with a
touch of disdain, 'You're actually saying
something. '"This "actually saying something" is
another way of phrasing the style of the
Intellectual Community. If someone is
"actually saying something" it usuallymeans that he/she is not saying anything
that has been said before. By thisstandard, a member of the IntellectualCommunity should not state the banal orobvious - it is better to describe the
exciting or unobvious. "Actually sayingsomething" might be translated then, as"saying something original."This valorization of "originality" often
leads 'to the Intellectual Style I am trying
to describe. To recant former wisdom (asa Native American elder might recite atraditional story) is to be "flat" and"unexciting." Exciting scholarship, on theother hand, focuses on "new insights" and"different angles" on old subjects - or
maybe even creating "new subjects.II
Thisattitude is embodied in the concept of a"thesis." An essay or academic book must(as we are dutifully taught) have a"thesis"- an idea that sets it apart from any
other essay or book - and a doctoral thesisis, by definition, a piece of purely
"original" scholarship.Fortunately for the Intellectual
Community, technology is constantlycreating "new" communities, "new"
perceptions, and "new" problems. "Old"problems are transformed, giving them
"new" nuances and manifestations. It
becomes the passion then, of theIntellectual Community to bring these"new" situations to light, to make thegeneral public (or at least other
Intellectuals) aware of the "new-ness" ofour current situation. This is what I meanby "making the visible the invisible. II
While this task of perceiving an all-
pervasive substance is regarded as nearlyimpossible, it certainly is not completely
impossible. And it is charged with that
quest that I see the Intellectual Community
often embarking on ambitious projects to"make the visible the invisible II - to
uncover all-pervasive ideologies or mythicbeliefs (virgin lands, manifest destinies,
8
8/6/2019 American Studies Forum: Winter 1992
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/american-studies-forum-winter-1992 9/9
gender constructions, racial biases, social
distinctions) that have hitherto remained
unperceived, but now, under "new"
circumstances and with "new" scholarly
tools, will be laid bare.
The unfortunate arrogance of this
perspective is that once the "invisible has
been made visible" (via "rigorous
scholarship"), this attitude often translates
into "We (the Intellectual Community) see
more clearly than you. We understand
black-ness or German-ness or Indian-ness
(or even Intellectual-ness) better than
anyone else. "
I think this happens because the usual
pattern (or style) of the Intellectual
Community is to first question basic
assumptions or explanations of the world,
and then (often with dramatic flourish)
uncover the "real" cohesive or dynamic
forces behind a particular literary style,
historical movement, or some other item
under intellectual scrutiny. This
movement from one set of beliefs to a
"new" and "better" set of beliefs is often
characterized as a "conversion," and while
most scholars today try to acknowledge
that they don't expect their "new" position
is the "ultimate answer," it is still assumed
that this"new" position is "better" than
their former beliefs or the beliefs of most
people. In other words, they have been
"enlightened." And as is typical of
religious converts, the "enlightened"
scholar often seeks other converts to this
"new" and "higher ground."
The thing that is most fun about this kind
of analysis is to watch how my own
writing (and "scholarly analysis")
participates in this style of the Intellectual
Community. This essay considers itself
(speaking of these words as if they are
somehow detached from me) an "original"
piece of writing - although there may be
many Intellectuals who have said what I
have said, but far more eloquently (or in
other words, more "originally"). The
ironic illusion, of course, is that I
somehow stand outside the Intellectual
Community and that I can perceive and
"make visible the invisible. "
So, in the end (if there is an end), this
essay (as the Deconstructionists would
gladly point out) implodes on itself. It is a
circular argument. Author Nina Baym's
final word is also my condemnation: "As
in the working out of all theories, its
weakest link has found it and broken the
chain." My only hope then, as a member
of the Intellectual Community, is that
someone will find it to be "original."
Works Cited
Anderson, B. Imagined Communit ies.Verso, 1983.
Baym, N. "Melodramas of Beset
Manhood: How Theories of
American Fiction Exclude Women
Authors." American Quanerly, 33
(Summer, 1981), 123-139.
Levernz , D. Manhood and the
American Renaissance . Ithaca:
Cornell Press, 1989.
9